I'm starting to have a real problem with going to school

Intellectually judged, judged on confidence and/or ability, judged on sexual prowess, even...

All wrong. Judging someone based on their car is just as immoral, and useless, as judging someone based on their toaster.

And I'm a car guy - and I do it inadvertently all the time. But I don't take myself seriously.

Well, I did not say that if a person is judged for some things on the basis of the car he drive, that is not silly. But, it doesn't follow from that that all judgments made on that basis are silly. It would depend on the judgment.

No. He might just need the job.

Intellectually judged, judged on confidence and/or ability, judged on sexual prowess, even...

All wrong. Judging someone based on their car is just as immoral, and useless, as judging someone based on their toaster.

And I'm a car guy - and I do it inadvertently all the time. But I don't take myself seriously.

Well, I suppose that's the shorter way to say it, yes.

So, like TickTock is saying, if someone doesn't like his car because it's a Kia, not a Jag, he should be dismissive of such thoughts as they aren't based in reason.

Judging, for some reason, is often used with a negative connotation. Judging is not always bad, is it?

Let's go back to the car example, for a moment:

Quote:

So, like TickTock is saying, if someone doesn't like his car because it's a Kia, not a Jag, he should be dismissive of such thoughts as they aren't based in reason.

Why should he be dismissive of such thoughts?

This isn't precisely what I was saying. I was suggesting that perhaps it is a mistake to spend too much time looking at oneself in the mirror that society holds up to you, as you will often appear as far more distorted than you actually are.

There is a reason some snakes have rattles, for instance.

You're a part of society, just as I am. I'm not quite sure what mirror you think society holds up to you, that you can't, or don't, hold up to yourself. Do you think you could be a bit more specific?

What I'm most interested in is the point in which judging transforms from a thing which simply allows us to sort and understand data, to a negativistic approach. The point where you think it compromises the individual in some way. And that's the impression I've got from you and bm - that it is wiser not to judge ourselves in some cases, in fear of self-condemnation of some sort. It was almost like a word of advice given, something one would find in a self-help book.

So, just what are those cases, and why do you think we should avoid them? And, if you would, contrast these with cases where you don't think judging is a bad thing at all.

Well, I suppose that's the shorter way to say it, yes.

But that is not saying the same thing, only more economically. It is different.

So, just what are those cases, and why do you think we should avoid them? And, if you would, contrast these with cases where you don't think judging is a bad thing at all.

Where you can feel free to judge someone is when they are killing another human being, where they are physically harming someone, or something, when they are stealing, cheating, or lying. These are negative things, and a negative "judgment" is justified.

When judgement crosses over into stereotyping, I think, is when individuals are compromised.
Yet, some stereotypes are true. So what is one to do?

Perhaps the mirror analogy was not apt. My point, I think, is that if you allow yourself to become disconsolate because you don't think you have the right car, clothes, or hairdo based only on current widely embraced social trends and your perception of the bearing of said trends on your own sense of value as a human being, then you are at risk of shortchanging yourself as to your actual potential long-term worth.

I say to not judge someone on a superficial basis. Skin color, for example. Gender, for another. Those kinds of things should not make a black and white judgment about a person

Where you can feel free to judge someone is when they are killing another human being, where they are physically harming someone, or something, when they are stealing, cheating, or lying. These are negative things, and a negative "judgment" is justified.

If I understand correctly, bmc is saying that many people judge too quickly based on superficial things. They see what clothes you are wearing or what beer you are drinking and judge you negatively. This is certainly true. TickTock is a suggesting as a solution that we care less about what snobby people think about us.

And I am saying that they are wrong. It is not the judging itself that is wrong, it is when the judging is presumptuous or unsupported, that it becomes a problem.

You can certainly tell a lot about a person by what they are wearing, or what beer they drink. For instance, if someone were dressed in rags and, everytime I walked by them begged for money, I would probably judge that that person were homeless. I may have lots of other evidence for thinking this, too. If my friend only drank Yuengling and stated he wouldn't drink other countries' beer, I would probably judge he A.) Only liked American beer or B.) Was patriotic in some way. There's nothing wrong with this judgment. Even in this case, where I don't have a substantial amount of evidence, I wouldn't interpret this as morally wrong, or unsupported. I have good reason for judging as I did.

I am suggesting it is fine to care about what people think of us, whether they be snobby or not. Are you suggesting we should only care what non-snobby people think of us? Why? Is it because you think snobby people are wrong by default, because they're snobby? Well, that would be fallacious.

Don't you agree that if someone makes an unsupported and incorrect presumption about us we shouldn't pay it much heed?

Even if it is incorrect, it still may be wise to pay it some attention. Sometimes it's better to demonstrate why the person shouldn't assume X means Y (if they shouldn't) - explain to them why what they say is fallacious.

But the point is we keep tossing general words and phrases around like, "judge" and "don't care what others think", but we mean specific circumstances. My point is that we should try to be as specific as possible when we use these words or phrases. If we are not, if we do not present a reasoned argument, we run the risk of doing just the thing that we feel so adamant against!

But you can become disconsolate about anything, not simply those things we refer as superficial and material. I, for instance, become disconsolate regarding some things intellectual (which I discuss on this forum). Is this any better?

Once again, I'm looking for why you're targetting those things material and superficial, and dismissing everything else that people can, and do, obsess over and become disconsolate about. And, more importantly, I want to know why you think judging someone on their material possessions is necessarily fallacious (if you do... I got the impression you do, as you keep pointing it out).